Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Buttock Augmentation with Silicone Implants: A Multicenter Survey Review of 2226 Patients

Mofid, M. Mark M.D.; Gonzalez, Raul M.D.; de la Peña, José Abel M.D.; Mendieta, Constantino G. M.D.; Senderoff, Douglas M. M.D.; Jorjani, Soheila Ph.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: April 2013 - Volume 131 - Issue 4 - p 897–901
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182818ec0
Cosmetic: Original Articles

Background: Enhancement of buttock volume with gluteal silicone implants has been performed by surgeons for over 30 years, but no studies have examined complication rates or outcomes of more than single-surgeon experiences. Numerous technical differences in how gluteal augmentation surgery with implants is performed also exist, and to date, surgeon preferences for implant plane, incisional access, implant type, and drain use have not been quantified.

Methods: A 10-question survey was sent to 83 targeted members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons requesting information about number of cases performed, duration of surgeon experience, implant placement plane and incisional access, implant type, length of typical surgery, use of drains and antibiotic irrigation solution, surgeon satisfaction and surgeon assessment of patient satisfaction, and number of complications experienced.

Results: Nineteen respondents (25 percent response rate) provided data on 2226 patients. Thirteen respondents (68.4 percent) favored the intramuscular plane of dissection over the subfascial plane. Preference for incisional access was nearly equally divided between a single incision in the gluteal cleft (10 respondents) and two incisions separated within the cleft (nine respondents). The total number of complications reported was 848 (38.1 percent).

Conclusions: Gluteal augmentation with silicone implants has gained popularity in the last decade. Despite this, no previous studies have examined multisurgeon experiences with this procedure to determine complication rates or surgeon technical preferences. The authors present data from a survey sent to experienced gluteal augmentation surgeons. Advances in technique and implant options are needed to improve complication rates experienced with this procedure.

La Jolla and San Marcos, Calif.; São Paulo, Brazil; Huizquilucan, Mexico; Miami, Fla.; and New York, N.Y.

From the Division of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Ribeirão Preto; private practice; and College of Business Administration, California State University.

Recipient of the Ralph Millard Award for most outstanding presentation, 39th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Québec City, Québec, Canada, September 15, 2012.

Received for publication August 8, 2012; accepted September 17, 2012.

Disclosure:Dr. Gonzalez receives royalties from the sale of his book, Buttocks Reshaping (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Indexa Editora Ltda; 2006). Dr. Mendieta receives royalties from the sale of his book, The Art of Gluteal Sculpting (St. Louis, Mo.: Quality Medical Publications, 2011). The remaining authors have no other relevant financial disclosures.

M. Mark Mofid, M.D.; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, 4150 Regents Park Row, Suite 300, La Jolla, Calif. 92037, drmofid@mofidplasticsurgery.com

©2013American Society of Plastic Surgeons